Chhotu Murmu v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.100 of 2023 Anil Murmu @ Chhoto @ Chhotu Murmu Versus The State of Jharkhand -------- ..... … Petitioner …. …. Opposite Party
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND For the Petitioner For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Advocate : Mr. Sanat Kumar Jha, A.P.P. -------- 03/ 29th February, 2024 1. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 3rd January, 2023 passed by the learned District Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Godda in Criminal Appeal No.73 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court refused to interfere with the order dated 28th November, 2022 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in Inquiry No.134 of 2022 arising out of Sunderpahari P.S. Case No.33 of 2022 by which the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner—CCL has been falsely implicated in this case on account of land dispute and he has been languishing in observation home for more than one year seven months. There is no cogent evidence against him in regard to commission of the alleged offence and nothing is adverse against him in his Social Investigation Report. 3. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The brief facts leading to this criminal revision are that the mother of the victim has given the written information with these allegations that she along with her husband had gone to the agricultural field to see the crop after having left her children at home. When she came back at 11 a.m., she, her husband and her - 2 - minor daughter had gone to take bath in the river. While taking bath, the minor daughter was crying and complaining for the pain in the private part and on being asked it was told by her that uncle (the present petitioner) took her towards the forest and has done wrong act with her. The blood was also oozing from private part and swelling was there. The F.I.R. of the same incident was given with the police station concerned and same was registered as Case Crime No.33 of 2022 under Sections 342, 376 AB, 376(2)(f) and Section 6 of the POCSO Act against the petitioner/Juvenile. 5. The I.O. conducted the investigation and also recorded the statement and restatement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in which she reiterated the contents of the F.I.R. The statement of Suraj Mani Murmu (elder sister of the victim) was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she stated that the victim was weeping. She came and on being asked she was naming uncle and due to doubt that something wrong might have been done by the uncle, the F.I.R. was lodged against him. The statement of mother of the victim was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the same kind of statement was given by her and stated that since the victim was naming to uncle for the pain, therefore, this F.I.R. was lodged by her. 6. So far as the medical evidence is concerned, the same is not on record. The vaginal swab, nail clipping and vaginal smear slide were sent for examination and report of the same has not been received till date. 7. It is the settled law that while disposing of the bail application of a Juvenile, the gravity or nature of the offence cannot be taken into consideration. It is also the settled law that ordinarily the bail application of a Juvenile should be allowed unless and until there are exceptional circumstance as laid down under proviso of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act which reads as under : “Section 12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law - 3 - (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a abailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the persons release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home [or a place of safety, as the case may be] in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order. (4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail.” 8. In Social Investigation Report of the Juvenile, his attitude towards the family members and neighbors is shown positive and it is stated that the CCL is not having any criminal antecedent. 9. In view of the discussions as made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the learned J.J. Board and the learned Appellate Court needs interference by this Court. 10. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is hereby allowed and the aforesaid orders are, hereby, quashed and set aside. 11. In consequence, thereof, the petitioner – CCL is directed to release on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each by his guardian to the satisfaction of the court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in Inquiry No.134 of 2022 arising out of Sunderpahari P.S. Case No.33 of 2022, subject to condition that guardian of the Juvenile shall give an undertaking that he would keep vigil eye on the Juvenile and would control him from coming in association of the known criminals. Rohit (Subhash Chand, J.)